You are here

Archived: East Midlands Domiciliary Care Branch Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 28 September 2017

We inspected the service on 27 and 28 July 2017 and both days were announced. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice of the inspection. This was because the location provides a domiciliary care service. We needed to be sure that the registered managers would be available to speak with us.

East Midlands Domiciliary Care Branch provides personal care to adults with a range of needs including people with a learning disability living in their own homes. At the time of the inspection there were 49 people using the service.

At the time of our inspection there was two registered managers in place. It is a requirement that the service has a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run. The service had two registered managers to share the work between them.

People and their relatives told us that they felt safe while they received support from staff at East Midlands Domiciliary Care Branch. Staff understood their responsibilities to protect people from abuse and avoidable harm and to remain safe. There were procedures in place to manage incidents and accidents.

Risks associated with people’s support had been assessed and reviewed. Where risks had been identified control measures were in place to protect people’s health and welfare. Checks had been completed on equipment that people used and the environment to ensure they were safe.

There were enough staff to meet people’s needs. They were recruited following the provider’s procedures to makes sure people were supported by staff with the right skills and attributes. Staff received appropriate support through an induction and regular supervision. There was training available for staff to provide and update them on safe ways of working.

People received support with their prescribed medicines from staff who had completed training in how to administer medicines safely. Guidance was available to staff on the safe handling of people’s medicines.

People were encouraged to follow a balanced diet. We saw that people chose their own meals and were involved in making them. People were supported to maintain their health and well-being. This included having access to healthcare services such as to their GP.

People were supported to make their own decisions. Staff and the registered manager had an understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 20015 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. Staff told us that they sought people’s consent before providing support.

People were involved in decisions about their support. They told us that staff treated them with dignity and respect. We saw that people’s records were stored safely and staff spoke about people’s support requirements in private.

People were supported to develop skills to maintain their independence. Support plans contained information about people, their likes, dislikes and preferences.

People were supported by staff who they knew well and who they felt listened to them. They received support that was centred on them as a person.

People and their relatives knew how to make a complaint. The complaints procedure was available so that people knew the procedure to follow should they want to make a complaint.

People and staff felt the service was well managed. The service was led by two registered managers who understood their responsibilities under the Care Quality Commission (Registration) Regulations 2009. Staff felt supported by the registered managers.

People and their relatives had opportunities to give feedback about the quality of the service that they had received. Systems and processes were in place so that checks were carried out on the quality of the service that was delivered.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 28 September 2017

The service was safe.

People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm by staff who knew their responsibilities for supporting them to keep safe.

There was a sufficient number of staff to meet people�s support requirements. Staff had been checked for their suitability prior to starting work.

Checks had been completed on equipment and the environment to make sure it was safe.

People received their prescribed medicines from staff who were trained to administer these.

Effective

Good

Updated 28 September 2017

The service was effective.

People received support from staff who had the necessary knowledge and skills. Staff received guidance and training.

People were asked for their consent by staff when offering their support.

People were encouraged to follow a balanced diet. They had access to healthcare services when they required them.

Caring

Good

Updated 28 September 2017

The service was caring.

People were treated with kindness and compassion by staff. Their privacy and dignity was respected.

People were involved in making decisions about how their support was delivered. They were encouraged to develop their independence.

Responsive

Good

Updated 28 September 2017

The service was responsive.

People were supported by staff who they felt knew them well and listened to them.

People and their relatives knew how to make a complaint.

People received support that was centred on them as an individual.

People were supported to access activities they enjoyed.

Well-led

Good

Updated 28 September 2017

The service was well led.

Staff were supported by the registered managers and knew their responsibilities.

People, their relatives and staff had opportunities to give suggestions about how the service could improve. People, staff and relatives felt involved in developing the service.

The registered managers were aware of their responsibilities and checks were in place to monitor the quality of the service.